A lot of heli are suffering because “Bad” missile and only a few get FnF missile. And MMW radar missile are not the answer. USA literally don’t have a better missile. They have two options 1 have about the same range as missile in game and was cancel and another its still on test fase.
Also i love how Bias post muh 1000000 times RCS than X. When in reality it only reduce the detection range 1/4 of a normal heli. So if a X heli can be detect by radar at 100km this thing its detectable at 25km.
Biased people don’t realize that not only this thing fail. But also much newer project like Invictus also fail.
If these people have read anything about RCS they would know that this won’t work. Even the frontal arc it have a lot of gaps and surface that lower it RCS. But they haven’t and only come here posting pr stuff.
Why? They could be implemented the same way as IIR missiles since MMW blocking smoke formulations do exist and including it in the generic mix seems fair for game balancing purposes
The AGM-179, or -176 is right there, For the Comanche sure, it’s limited to the hellfire but the AH- 58 / -64s do have options, and the AH-1Z has more exotic options as well.
Source?
Not in any way related to the underlying technical concepts, but more on the political side of things and that in the late 90’s early 2000’s a land war in Europe which the Comanche was tailored specifically for became much less likely and so could no longer justify ongoing costs, where pressing need for funding appeared in other areas which curtailed the project.
Certainly doesn’t look PR related at all, does it?
In part because gaijin in their infinite wisdom thought the pilot was actually in the back while making the model. However, come dev it got reported that the pilot is up front and they had to panic develop the actual pilot seat.
This is why the gunner’s rear seat model is so unusually detailed, even if low rez.
it would be amazing if the pilot and gunner’s seat’s were operable. Will be pretty handy especially for sim players. Pilot focusing on flying and RWR. Gunner seat for if u have a good spot u wanna engage and can operate from that
Im so sick of this bs, one day they say “potential capability is enough for a feature to be added” then the other they say “was not implemented so wont be added” Like wtf is your standard then??
Thought immediately after making the report that they would do it and here we are.
The thing is though both cockpits are near enough identical to each other, the only noticeable difference is the lack of a keyboard for the gunner, so I don’t know why but instead of just finishing the cockpit why they decided to give up on it.
But honestly how they have handled the Comanche is appalling. No IRCM, no countermeasures, cut the amount of Stingers in half, only AGM-114B which left US service before the Comanche was built, gun can’t be stowed, no armour, had to fight for an RWR and they gave up on the report for a better RWR too. Infact all the outstanding dev reports have just been abandoned.
I would say its surprising but that would be a complete lie.
We don’t know, we know there was one at very least planned (ALQ-144(V)3 & ALQ-144A ). Similarly to the one that the AH-64A(+) or -64D could optionally take mounted as part of the Longbow program.
So it was designed and a mount was planned but I don’t know if it was mounted to one of the Flight test airframes, or to one of the partially completed airframes at the time of the program being spun down.
It should at a minimum actually meet the precedent threshold that set by the YTak-141’s IRST blister that was never mounted to an airframe.
I see, thanks. For me at least, I’m neither for nor against it since it’s not confirmed.
Does Gaijin’s reasoning hold up though? I assume that since it’s passive, then it would defeat the purpose of stealth? Or is it something where you only turn it on when you get spotted or expect to get spotted?
If it does hold up, what does that say about the Su-57 or other Stealth aircraft (if there is any) that uses some sort of missile jammer?
Not really since it’s an optional system and so could be mounted as needed
It’s not a reactive system, but a proactive defensive system as it is always emitting in the defended sector(s) while active. unlike DIRCM, which activates in response to a detected threat, and provides the same jamming signal.
It is tied into the existing suite of defensive systems, so could automatically become active in response to a spike from a known / potential IR threat in a covert manor (as the ALR-39A RWR has classification capabilities built into the system). and the delayed onset of the system becoming effective could be significantly sped up if it was updated to include the later -144A upgrade that swapped out the Carbon source for a vapor arc lamp.
It’s really up to the Crew / mission planning as to how they have it set up and what the expected threat is comprised of, it’s not like many ground based IRST systems existed in the early 90’s to the actual increase to the IR signature doesn’t amount to much if not yet detected, and once you are it’s better to be protected than not. Also since it for example it (doctrinally) precluded the carriage of Flares in the M-130 dispenser for the AH-1F / AH-64A it was seen to be perfectly serviceable against novel IR threats at the time.
True AoA limit of the F-16 is about 35~38 degrees or so for deep stalls IIRC, the 28 figure implemented includes a fair margin of safety since it can’t take everything into account and has to continue to function in the case of lost sensors or spurious / transient input, and it’s not a continues system but interpolates many times a second.
The issue with the in game system is that such a system doesn’t play nice with the currently implemented instructor since it would create feedback loops causing significant issues with controllability within certain input regimes.
Also it wouldn’t really be fair to not also include the arbitrary 1.5x increase in available load factor that all other aircraft receive, which is what is modeled. Since other airframes would otherwise be able to fly their wings off, and it’s not like the edge in sustained performance that a FBW system would provide can’t be exploited;
By simply dumping excess energy that is effectively unusable for the F-16 since it can’t tighten the turn harder and so would perform drastically worse due to said cap forcing the turning circle much wider and being unable to dump excess energy to tighten down the turn by cashing in on the instant performance to then make gains at optimal corner speeds.
